X PREFACE. be seen that on the whole I agree with the conclusions of Count Iliant. Each of the following questions has been and is still the subject of controversy : (1.) The conduct of Venice; as to which the questions to be settled are : a. Was there a treaty with Malek Adel like that described by Charles Ilopf, by which, in return for benefits con- ferred on the republic, Venice undertook not to con- vey the Crusaders to Egypt ? h. Did Dandolo intentionally make difficulties w^hile the Crusaders were on the Island of Lido, in order to carry out his part in such treaty ? c. Was the expedition to Zara part of Dandolo's design for a diversion of the crusade, or was it due to acci- dental circumstances, without premeditation on the part either of Dandolo or Boniface ? Count Iviant maintains that the treason of Venice was pre- meditated even before the arrival of the Crusaders at the Lido. Against this hypothesis M. Tessier has presented what is un- doubtedly an argument worth attention, derived from a letter of Innocent, calling upon the Venetian clergy to emulate the devotion of their own laymen to the cause of the Holy Land. Ilurter doubts whether there was premeditation. (2.) The design and conduct of the Crusaders : a. What was the destination desired by the Crusaders, and were they agreed that this should be Egypt? h. Were the Crusaders duped into violating their vows by acquiescing in the diversion upon Zara, or did they willingly accept the proposal as the best under the circumstances?
